if I want okay good evening everyone and welcome to the December 7th 2023 virtual meeting of the Jersey City Zoning Board of adjustment this virtual meeting is held in accordance with njsa 10 col 4-12 which is the open public meetings act I would like to call this meeting to order uh Francisco um are there any uh Sunshine announcements to share yes in accordance with the open Public's meeting act notice has been given to the Jersey journal the Jersey City Reporter lalito and posted with the city clerk on Thursday November 30th 2023 we have the notices to be marked okay this will be B1 in meeting okay can you please take roll call so I see commissioner Allen here commissioner zooki here commissioner yes commissioner Bole here chair here and chair Co here have a total of six Commissioners tonight okay can we please all stand for the flag salute yes to the flag of the United States states America and the repblic to The Republic which it stands Nation One Nation one nation under God indivisible with liberty libery and justice for all okay can we please swear in any staff that are in attendance tonight he do you all swear or affirm that the testimony or comments you will give this evening will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes yes okay uh any correspondence Francisco let me sh scre give me a second can you all see that all right so this is the December 7th 2023 Zoning Board of adjustments meeting now the only items that will'll be moving forward tonight will be item 13 this is case z22 2 -107 it is for an appeal with a c variance and the alternative the address is 68 W Street the next case will be item 16 this is case z21 d74 this is for a preliminary and final major site plan with a d variance the address is 238 to 247 Street and lastly this is the last item we will be hearing tonight item number 18 case z223 D20 this is for a minor site plan Amendment the address is 74 B Street all items on the agenda besides those three items will be carried to the January 11th 2024 Maye okay so um our first case um is z 22-10 7 um so do we have uh Stephen Joseph as the attorney on that is he present moting Stephen we promote Mr Joseph hello everybody good evening Stephen Joseph for the applicant um uh Council can we confirm we have uh notices please yes Stephen you did notice we have your affidavit proof of service notice of publication so Bridget will Mark that as A1 for this application a one moment this is A1 in evidence for this application okay all right uh wonderful thank you so 68 wne Street this is uh this is an appeal of uh the determin of a city administrative officer um that access to an existing parking lot was abandoned um the applicant feels that the determination doesn't make a a lot of sense that's the reason for our appeal um the the use was determined to be legal um legal existing use and the applican feels that you can't you can't have a use such as this a legal use without access to it um it would be like saying you could have a house but you can't have any doors or um so what we're asking for as part of the the appeal portion of this is to have that uh have the administrative officer's decision overturned and permit us to use uh the access on the site um in the alternative because it it is sometimes harsh to overrule an administrative officer of the applicant has also attached a c variant to the application um sometimes less harsh to Grant a c variance and the board can control that better um and the board can attach conditions to the C variances um where they can't to appeals So the applicant's plan for the site is to eventually develop it but right now it's going to be used for parking um specifically the the local mosque and the Barrel House have expressed interest in renting parking spaces there um applicant then plans to develop the site down the road um the applicant would also be open to a condition uh putting a time limit restriction uh on the use of the site for approximately three years um you have all the papers on the record there's a series of emails with the administrative officer confirming that the use is il legal um and and we don't have any experts this evening we feel everything's on the on the paper okay so you have no experts um is there anyone from the public uh looking to make comments Francisco yes there are quite a few hands that just raised I will promote Helena Chen hi would you raise your great hand to be sworn please do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth I do thank you please State and spell your full name for the record sure Helena Chen first name is h l n a last name is C hen and I am resident at 67 Wayne which is directly across the street from 68 Wayne for the last uh nine years in change um so as far as the uh attorney representing 68 Wayne his uh metaphor as far as having a uh house without a door uh that's incorrect that door has existed for its use as a parking lot for the last nine years that door just happened to be an entrance on Columbus which um I bought my home my current Residence at 67 way knowing that and having no issues with that as far as using it um with a you know the the curb cut they're suggesting that's um not something I anticipated or would want in this neighborhood because it would take up several um parking spaces um that would you know be necessary and also would uh cause additional congestion and as far as needing um parking spaces for the Barrow house or the mosque in the neighborhood within a quarter to half a mile there are over a dozen public parking um parking lots uh street parking all options that are available to me or any member of the public so as far as needing additional parking lots I'm not um I'm not able to understand why that's necessary okay thank you Francisco anyone else out there promoting Aaron morel and if there is anyone else in the public who does wish to speak please raise your hand at this time hello would you raise your right hand thank you do you swear or affirm the testimony your bant to given this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth I do thank you st and spell your full name for the record my name is Aaron moral that's a a r o n last name moral m o r r i l l thank you thank you everybody um I would um adopt everything Helena just said from across the street um I would uh add that I live right next to uh this proposed parking lot um I've lived here since 2009 um uh it was as Helena said uh a parking lot with an entrance on Christopher Columbus uh which made a huge difference uh and is very different than what the applicant is proposing um I will say that since we have lived here we have looked forward to the day that we would no longer have a parking lot next to us um we've had automobiles literally bang into the side of our building I've had the entire building Shake I we've had rats we've had garbage um and uh it's been a nightmare living next to a a parking lot um it I understand that it was permitted at the time because of the uh history but um that parking lot is now gone and that entrance on Christopher Columbus is is now gone the use is not a permitted use from what I understand for a historic neighborhood um uh it is opposed uh the use of this space as a of of this lot as a parking lot is opposed by virtually everybody in the neighborhood we don't want it we don't think it's necessary as Helena said there are other parking lots nearby there are uh numerous mass transit options for anybody that wants to come down town from another part there's the PATH train there are buses um there's a taxi stand this is not a needed uh amenity by any stretch um I would would add uh that I actually had to sue the last owner of the parking lot because of the problems we had living next to a parking lot um it has been I understand the policy of the city to try and promote mass transit one minute too um this will uh not be consistent with the city's policy of promoting mass transit um and for all of these uh reasons um I you know I I I can't um stress how opposed we are in this neighborhood to this and how opposed I am specifically and my wife thank you thank you promoting Jennifer I raise your right hand if you sworn thank you do you swear or affirm the testimony you're B to given this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you and please State and spell your full name for the record sure it's Jennifer Newman and that's J NN i f e r last name is Newman Neu m M Ann thank you thank you so much um I agree with both Helena and uh Aaron as well and we live at 69 Wayne Street uh so also across the street from the proposed uh parking lot cutouts entrance exit um aside from the things that we've already mentioned and I don't want to be repetitive and take up more of your time um I feel that because that lot uh entrance and exit that they're wanting to do on Wayne Street uh was abandoned over 25 years ago um and then this neighborhood was a historic neighborhood I can't imagine why they would want to open that up again um and cause additional traffic and the possible danger where we already deal with folks that blow through stop signs we do have Newark Avenue over here so we do get visitors for restaurants which is great um and they park in the parking garages so I can't imagine why they would need to come down a residential street um or pull out of a parking lot on a residential street where there are homes and children um and we would just be fighting additional uh traffic and possible dangers thereof um and again I think that we've been going through this quite a few times now uh and we continue to mention the same items and we keep hearing uh more and more reasons uh why this was allowed previously except that again Helena mentioned the exit and entrance was on Columbus it was not on Wayne and that would be a problem for us um so we are opposed thank you thank you promoting the van vorce neighborhood association hi can you see me you know I'm sorry I am actually um there we go there we go I shouldn't be under van vorest should be under myself s War please you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this proceeding be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do okay and please State and spell your full name for the record sure my full name is Cecilia c c i l i a last name delion dle o n um I am the co-chair of the Planning and Development Committee for the van Force neighborhood association I didn't realize I logged in under their email uh instead of mine um I am also a longtime resident of Jersey City over 25 years going on I'm a licensed architect and also Al a certified zoning officer at this point um a couple things to say um I'm just going to read it make it easier um as I understand this application the previous owner of these sites has also owned the larger Parcels behind it the larger lot is totally within the Columbus Corner RDP and these two lots on Wayne are in the vanves park historic district since these lots are continuous and were owned by the same entity the entire area was be being used as valet parking access solely from from Columbus Drive the curb Cuts along Wayne were never used as access and there was never any intent to use them as access I did a little research and looked at the historic photos available on Google Maps I have them here I know you can't see them but you could always look them up um or I could share my screen however but if you go back to the photos in 2007 there's two giant trees right where they're opening where they're proposing um the curb cut essentially or the the gate um and as if you go through the state you could see sometime in before 2012 uh the chain link fence was redone it was kind of put put back in line with the with the facades on the the historic facades and a smaller historically appropriate fence was put in in front of that I think I was on the historic board back then I think that was a condition of approval um in order to get the chain link fence up um then back in I think it was 2020 um these Lots were eventually sold that little fence stayed up up until then and then 2020 the Lots were sold um but clearly it was the previous owner's intent to abandon the parking lot for these two Parcels as there's no in Independent Drive access that little fence had no Gates nothing for a car to go through so obviously the previous owners abandoning that use um off of Wayne um in some after this app own the parcels the curb cuts and the sidewalk were reconstructed and the shorter historic fence was removed I'm sorry and the shorter what fence I'm sneezing as you're the shorter the shorter historic fence was removed um was taken down I'm not sure if this if this was done I mean the curb Cuts were redone things like I'm not sure if that was done with or without permits um also then on July 19th 2021 the head of the HDC issued a letter to the applicant stating that use variants would be required and that they had 20 days to appeal this determination since it's now 2023 I would think that time has expired on this opportunity to appeal I'd like to know how appeal could be brought up two years later essentially and they only had 20 days I do agree that this application requires a D1 use variance for allowing a parking lot as a principal use in the van vores Park historic district so it's unclear to me why this applicant is also requesting a c variance even for if for some unknown reason this board decides that a parking lot use can continue even though the planning office said it would be it would require D1 variance an application for the curb cut would still be a D2 variance as an expansion of that use it's not a variants there's no benefit to the public allowing a private parking lot in the historic district there are however many detriments increased traffic and con and congestion increased noise loss of publicly accessible parking spaces 100% lot coverage with no uh drainage in a area plone to flooding ultimately introducing surface level parking into a wellestablished historic district is contrary to the goals of the master plan where overall the use of cars is being disturbed enaged um this application should Bei be denied sorry your three minutes is over okay um also as I'm a stickler for a drawing for the drawings the drawings submitted don't show curve Cuts application a curve cut and they don't show any okay thank you voting Allison Navaro I should say I I miss I I did not say that you have three minutes to speak and um Med will be the timekeeper thank you okay raise your right hand please if be sworn do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you and please State and spell your full name for the record Allison Navaro Aly s o n last name n a a r r o thank you thank you for the time um I'm a longtime resident of Jersey City I've been here for 25 years the last 20 years I've lived at 58 Wayne Street which is on the same side of the street as the proposed curb cut during those 20 years that has never been used as a driveway so 204 years I'd be interested to hear if there was a date that it was presumably used as a driveway when we moved in um there was a proposal for Columbus cornner that showed a parking garage potentially opening at that area and we were prepared to fight that as well even back then um my family has observed all the events that Cecilia listed the change in fence um I also have pictures on my phone that I could share if it was interesting of the day they arrived to taper the curb so that it looked like it was a driveway um I it is a historic district and this is a a residential historic Street and we comply with historic standards s that are intended to add value to our properties and they they are as detailed as the shadows of our window panes and so it seems to me that historic precedent that we are held to the tax records from 1930 should also be of consideration here it shows two homes with cast iron porches if I'm not mistaken in those two Lots at that time so definitely not a parking lot and the last point I want to make is that that that area of the parking lot even when it has been a much larger parking lot has been particularly dangerous because it faces a quieter residential street we have seen um graffiti on the buildings that that are adjacent to it on both sides that the owners then have to deal with and we've also had fireworks shot during the pandemic from those locations because it's dark because it's quiet aimed at the houses across the street and over their roofs I have video of that as well if that would be something you would like forwarded to the council those are the four P four points that I wanted to make it's never been done in 20 years um all events that Cecilia mentioned were um observed by my family and I have some them historic standards should apply and it's particularly bad area of that parking lot thank you thank you promoting Eric spec and there are currently two more hands that are red hi ra your right hand to be sworn you swear or affirm the testimony your about to given this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you and please State and spell your name for the record Eric spec e r i c s p c k thank you um I don't really have anything prepared I'm just going to riff uh on um some of the themes that were brought up today all of which are correct and I agree with from my neighbors um I've lived on Wayne Street since 2008 and um I've also experienced uh living near a parking lot elsewhere and it is never good for the community um it's true that there's graffiti it's true that there's noise it's true that there's litter it's true that there's congestion um it's clearly an inhibitor to any sort of affluence and development in our community and as you can see everybody on our block completely opposes this in fact I know others who couldn't join who couldn't make the call today also oppose it I really want that to be considered that if this were to happen it would be in direct opposition to the majority of the community not only that um what was said about historic standards is true um we've everyone on our block has abided by those rules much to our shagrin often and had to spend money to abide by those rules and it is appropriate that anyone you know who has property on that block should do the same and a parking lot doesn't meet those standards and lastly you know I also think it should be considered that the owner of this parking lot it's too often that they don't suffer the consequences of their own facilities and everything I just mentioned before the the noise the the dirtiness the um the graffiti the congestion you know this is uh not going to be suffered by the owner it'll be suffered by us the community and so for that reason for those reasons I vehemently oppose this as well thank you promoting the next attend hello raise your right hand to be sworn please you swear or firm the testimony your B to given this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you please St State and spell your yeah my name is sh Prasad first name is spelled sh r e y a s uh last name is spelled p r a s a d and I live at 57 W Street I'm gonna have to swear her in if she continues talking okay noise just kidding um yeah so uh I've uh as I said I live at 57 W Street uh I've owned the house for about three years now uh lived in Jersey City for for about five years um and I don't have much more to add beyond what eron Helena Jennifer Cecilia um Allison and uh Eric just mentioned but I just wanted to State for the record that I'm also opposed to the use of the property as a parking lot um I I firmly believe uh permitting the lot to would be a net negative on the street from a traffic perspect uh traffic perspective and really inconsistent with the historical nature of the neighborhood um and uh yeah that's all I have to say thank you you and promoting the last attendee I raise your right hand to be for you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to given this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth I do thank you please State and spell your full name for the record name is Jeff Harvey je FF last name Harvey h a r v is and Victor e y thank you I thank you and thank you for taking the opportunity to to speak um this will be quick everything that everybody else before me has said I I completely agree with um I think the purpose of me speaking is just to reiterate uh the opposition and and and the the fact that from a neighborhood perspective uh there is no benefit here and there are many other folks um who could not join this evening um that that feel the same way so from my perspective I would just encourage and request that uh that this be denied and that's it thank you very much and there are no other hands that are raised okay if we have no other comments then we can close out the public portion of the meeting um Commissioners do you have any comments or questions my only question is when they wrote it they said to to help the community center visitors where is this community center and that one person said about the community center Joseph I'm not I'm not sure what you're referring to well in the I'm looking at the P you know in the the form here and it says installation of electric gate to permit Community Center visitors to access the parking lot so who are the community center visitors that you're doing this for oh the the the mosque uh my clients's been in discussions with the mosque to range for parking so they they they need parking for the mosque so where are they parking now are they parking on their street I think wherever they can find I think wherever they can find parking so basically what's happening just another question the people who are worried about losing parking don't have parking anyway if all the MOs people are there correct I I I don't want to you know testify I'm just but I would would assume I would assume so I I I do also I do also want to say you know a lot of what the board heard from the public is that they don't want a parking lot here um and that's not really the question right the the administrative officer determined that the the parking lot is a it's illegal use on the site um we're not here asking for permission to have a parking lot we we have a parking lot right and and the applicant's position is that if we don't have access to that parking lot you're taking away our use right it does it doesn't it doesn't make sense um that that's what this application's about and and the only reason why a c variance was requested is to give the board a little more flexibility in in controlling the use but the primary part of the application is is the appeal that the the determination doesn't make sense to the applicant because can't use the property as it's legally permitted to be used without the access um I have a question um are these cars I saw I I went on Google so I saw the cars are they there permanently or is this is an ongoing in andout parking lot so a violation was issued and there's currently a municipal court hearing pending um so in lie of that and and because we have a you know a timely appeal filed all cars were removed from the site as to not incur any further fines so right now it's just blank it's just empty correct but that was only done because this appeal is pending and because there's a municipal hearing pending I see I have two questions um why is the entrance being moved from Columbus to Wayne and why was the first appeal that had a 30-day time frame in order to make the appeal not not met so so the the appeal was timely filed there was a a letter issued by an and then there was a series of emails that clarified and clarified the position in the letter and the appeal was was filed in a in a timely matter it did take us quite some time to get to this point um partially because when when we added the C variant in the alternative that triggered a historic preservation commission here um so the appeal would not require historic preservation commission C variant would um so in order to get proper jurisdiction we needed to go through that process as well so it did take us some time to get here but an appeal was was timely uh filed from the uh the original letter was July 19 2021 um and as far as access uh from Columbus that's a separate piece of property um this there's technically three separate Lots here uh 66 and 68 Wayne is is on Wayne Street arguably those they merged uh just as a matter of law but the parcel on Columbus is a totally separate parcel with a separate owner and that's I think currently being developed with the building so are you saying that there's uh no access or will be no access to that lot from Columbus because of the development that's correct okay but this area is not zoned for this parking lot and I'm listening individual speaking and they're saying they're abiding by the rules of the historic neighborhood association but this your your client doesn't want to abide by by putting a parking lot there and asking us to change that and give them that ability we're not we're not putting a park the parking lot's already there right that that was the determination that was made that that's a illegal use that's currently existing um so we're not asking for for a parking lot parking lot's already there this is about the gate and access we're just we're asking speaker please sorry Bridget goad so yeah we're just asking the board to recognize that we can't have the use without W with without the Act without the access excuse me I'm sorry you mentioned there's a cut curb on wind Street for that B I'm sorry what was the question you you mentioned that there is a cut Cur an entrance from wi Street that's true so there there were I believe two curb cuts on on Wayne Street and there was a gate there right and I think I think what the community is saying and what the what some of the Cities position is is that there there was also an iron gate um that was you know potentially blocking that access right so I I think I think the other side of this right to play devil's advocate here is that they city is saying that that iron that Iron Gate stopping us from using the site uh but at the same time the city's also saying that we're allowed to use the site for parking so what was the it was denied why can you clarify that again or or say that why was it denied in the first place because sure no so um I could read from the email I'm sure Tanya could also summarize if she wants to but might be better if I just read from the from the um hey I I was goingon to mark it in asib you want um anyway it might be easier uh yes so we can ENT this it's on the portal yeah it it's on it's on the it's on the portal um but there was a a letter and the position that that Ania took in the letter is that the the use is legal and permitted but because of the Landscaping uh and the iron fence that was in place um during portions of the prior ownership that the the curb cut in the access is no longer permitted right and that that inconsistency with the applicant feels is is the inconsistency the the legal use and the lack of ACC access is the nature of the appeal that's that's why we're here we're asking the board to reconcile that well wait wait let's let me just try to get this into perspective for a moment sure I'm reading an's letter of July 2021 she said that the use was abandoned now did you appeal that within 20 days we did appeal that within is that on the portal I don't see your notice of appeal somewhere it's here um we did submit uh we we we did submit within within the 20 days we we did file within 20 days I'm sure I could find uh the email where we sent it out but but you need more than an email don't you need uh don't you need the application of some sort I don't know Tanya is there a notice of appeal of of uh an's uh denial I mean she's saying that this was abandoned right so she's saying it's abandoned so there's two things here you want us to overturn that right based on what nothing well so but then the second thing is so you said okay let's let's let's uh let's cover our bases let's hedge our bets I guess is the right way to say it and let's go to Historic and get a c variance and historic denies that eight nothing so you're here for that appeal as well is that what we're doing so two appeals what one is from not an appeal of the historic denial historic denial is the recommendation to the zone right I'm sorry yeah yeah excuse me well it came here for the now we're reviewing it based on historics denial so that's the two issues that are before us do we do we reverse ANF that who who wrote something over two years ago with when we don't even at least I don't see a notice of appeal of that but let's put that to the side now we have a your application for a c variance in historic which historic recommends that we deny it a nothing I I did just want to clarify that that Ania withdrew her position in that letter is there another letter portal I didn't see there's a Ser there's a series of emails on on the portal from Ania that changes changes her position in that letter that it's not it's not a use variance she's not saying the use is not permitted she's saying the curb Cut's not permitted I I don't see that at least on what what uh what's on the the you know the so agenda here somewhere sorry co go ahead so if the curb cup is not permitted at least according to her then how can anything else proceed right exactly correct I mean I'm kind of like like it's kind of weird here in a sense that I mean I really don't know how this becomes a functional parking lot without a curb cut and if she's saying no curb cut then we still don't have her stuff right that we could look at like her letter and writing so I don't even I feel like there's a piece of evidence missing here right and I feel to and overturn this without that oil that we need it's on so the the series of emails is on the portal and it is the position of the city that the parking lot is legal use so curb cut is not legal the parking lot is a legal is a legal use but the curb is the problem cor correct and that and that's why we're that's exactly why we're appealing because a legal we don't feel legal use can be taken away for that reason but but you can't say the use is is is legal you can't say the use is allowed to be there and then say you can't access it but the people knew this when they were purchasing the property that putting a curb cut in was probably illegal and now they want us to overturn that or give you or Grant you a variance to do this it it was a functional parking lot at the time um and and and uh Council I'm also looking at the city's intake log which does show the appeal was filed in in a timely manner on the on the city's website I I think we're we're looking at two different things I mean I'm looking at what's on the case File when you open up the calendar you're looking at something totally different which we don't have access to and it's not in front of us I don't think all that I have in front of me is is ania's letter of July 19th 2021 saying that this use was abandoned now you're saying there's something other than than that if you could show it to me on what's under this case jacket number z22 Das 107 if you could show it to me on this I don't see it no it doesn't look like it's on the portal okay th those materials were were supposed to be on the portal and they are I think very important to the case you know I I I would ask that the I I I I would ask that the board not make a decision without reviewing those materials because they are give a great amount of context um emails that's what I suggest I don't think we can Stephen I don't want to you know postpone things but by the same token I don't see what you're talking about and neither Commissioners and so what you're talking change the you know change the facts change the law you know that expression no under understood yeah and I do I do apolog ol I didn't I didn't realize I you know I've been making a lot of statements and saying a lot of things that clearly board doesn't have uh context or reference to so I do apologize about that so you know this um will go into the new year um and we are going to have to re notice for that so it'll be a date um that I'll I'll coordinate with with staff I believe so what do you think so I'm looking over those emails now I mean the emails definitely show that there was a timely appeal that was filed and it was the emails were asking for clarification I I I'm not going to speak about something that's not on the portal um but I am familiar enough with this case that I know what Mr Joseph is talking about I I mean I can I can go through a number of things with you the timeline I think some relevant um legal review on this um or we can wait for the letter I I'm happy to do either I think that there's a lot of confusion so if I could at least I think provide some clarity as to kind of the the timeline and what's happening that might just be helpful I think to orient Commissioners okay I I'm in agreement with that but I would rather have in front of me not now I I'll listen to what you have to present for us Tanya but I would like to have these papers in front of me to be able to read them and come to my own decision based on you know all of this tonight yeah I agree with C me too I don't know if we want to spend more time on this table this for another time or what can we vote on the in the case no me vote on what he wants to know if we want to vote on this do you want us to vote on this tonight or withdraw it what do you want to do table no we can we can we can vote on holding the case until he get all the documentation well he'll be tbling it right you can table it we can table it for another day Mr meeting yeah I think that I think that's the best thing to do at this point so we can t table the case um and we'll see everybody next year okay well the question for you Mr Joseph is this uh if so we're going to carry it but the question is do you want to Ren notice what do you want I I prefer the ren notice going into a new year especially since we're going to be in person next year so I I would I I think it's better that re notice well you have a lot of public that's interested in this so that's probably the safest course of action yeah okay sorry about that but I didn't know what you were talking about by looking no I I apologize I I yeah I I apologize okay so we'll just adjourn this without a date right uh and you'll Ren notice okay great thank you you wonderful thank you everybody thank you a go holiday okay our next case is uh Z2 4 uh 238-247 Street and I think Charles Harrington is needs to be promote it don't see yeah I don't see chuck chuck Francisco I see he had case number 15 so he adjourn that and not 16 yeah let me just make sure yeah doesn't a second oh um so yeah the email that that he sent me he said that they were just carrying the uh two of his items so I figured so if he's not here guess we should here we go to 18 right away yeah okay okay all right so move forward I get okay so let's um look at case z20 23-00 uh2 at 74 Bower Street and uh Stephen Joseph is the attorney he's here okay all right hello everyone again um Jeff Lewis is our architect if we could go ahead and get him uh promoted um so this is an amendment to a minor site plan that was previously approved um by this board uh there was a a portion of the structure um that was supposed to be remaining on the site after some exploratory demolition was completed uh it was found that there there were no real footings or Foundation um and the building was not structurally sound so a portion is there's a note being changed on the plan essentially saying that there's a a new portion of the structure rather than a structure to be structure to rather than a structure what I'm sorry rather than a structure to remain and be repaired than you um all that will make a lot more context uh once we get Jeff up here there he is okay let's just give him a minute to start his video there we go let's get Jeff's sworn in do you sweare or affirm the testimony you're about to given this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do great and Stat andv your fold name for the record uh Jeffrey Lewis J FF re y l e w i s thank you you're welcome all right all right uh Jeff why don't you share your screen let's show the plans and I think we could pretty quickly explain what's going on sure can I just uh should I first for the record U my license is in good standing and active in the state of New Jersey sure fine and we recognize we know uh and actually it's someone has to let me share my screen give me a second Frisco sure Francisco are you there yeah we're good okay I'm good now okay so Stephen could you just let me know when it actually comes up yeah there sometimes a delay not yet Bo there we go we could see you now okay okay great so 74 Bowers uh we are talking about um the back half of the building so the front half of the building was an existing three-story building and then the back half of the building was an existing one-story garage uh we were hoping to keep the back walls that included this back wall here uh this wall along the side and the front wall all the one-story garage walls however as Stephen mentioned uh upon demolition uh we discovered that the walls were old um old concrete block walls that weren't structurally sound they were on just these kind of rock Rubble footings that were not very deep and were not structurally sound as well um so the only change that we're making in this application is taking what was a proposed uh wall to remain and be reused and we're demolishing that wall instead building a new 8 in block wall along all three of these property lines um that is the extent of the change the the bulk layout stays the same uh this wall along the back property line will be finished uh with a um smooth stucco finish painted gray like we usually do on block walls along the property line uh and as I mentioned the bulk of the building remains exactly the same it's just the change of uh using the existing uh first floor walls to um using new walls instead anything else I need to say directly Stephen or does that cover it uh I I think I think that's it yeah there there's I believe one of the conditions of the resolution of approval is that any changes even minor ones have to come back to the board so that's that's why we're here all right is there anyone in the public out in the public Francisco that's looking to make a comment on this I do see one hand raised promoting jeny I raise your swarm please do you swear or affirm the testimony your bance to given this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes and spell your full name for the record my full name is Jas and it's spelled j a n is a NY k i last name V as in Victor Y A S as in Sam thank you thank you so um I guess should I just start speaking yes so um my um uncle and my dad my dad owns the property Next Door 72 bar street I was here in may actually from January to May um as it kept getting delayed but um I just wanted to bring to the board's attention that we were not notified of this change or um was no communication and uh when we when I presented as a licensed architect and as a witness I did mention that um that all of those walls were not structurally stable and they had every intention of removing all of these walls and no plan for um coordinating any of that there is an elevation change uh a big portion of the back end of our property is supported by the wall and the current demolition I was just there two weeks ago uh the current demolition that has been done has been done halfhazard and the wall that is retaining our backyard is not short it's not structurally sound I'm not a structural engineer so I can't speak to that but they also haven't brought in a structural engineer or coordinated with us how they're going to maintain the structural stability of our backyard so um that is something that I would um expect that they respect uh for our backyard and I I would not approve this amendment without uh the required Shoring and bracing that would be required and without seeing the plans that they propose because they're going to be digging a foundation now which is going to further undermine the stability of our backyard okay is is there anyone else um in the public to make any comments Francisco asking to speak this time I do not see any other hands raised okay then we'll close out the public portion are there any Commissioners who have any questions or comments yeah I I like I have a question so there the young ladies referring to the backyard and the fence I remember seeing pictures of the backyard which really isn't in use um if I'm correct I don't think they were using the backyard at that time um how is that fence how is that backyard that the the the wall that she's referring to are you Shoring it up what are you doing to to to correct that issue so I could let I could let Jeff speak to that I mean nothing in the plan that was approved is changing except for um the change that that Jeff said and one of the arguments at at the original hearing that was that was made by individuals that we needed a full set of civil plans with all sorts of engineering drawings but that I I mean the application was approved and this application doesn't require that level of of drawings and materials because it's it's a minor site major of course there construction refering I'm sorry my my question was to Mr Lewis um what are you planning to do the sh up that that backyard sure um so I think she's talking she I know they have their um what I guess used to be a garage or a shed or or some sort of masonry building in their backyard that's that's near the property line but not on the property line um when we do remove it the the contractor is of course responsible for making sure that that our work does not negatively affect any work on the property next door so they there will be measures that the city requires that they will have to um they will have to abide by for sure that's generally not drawings that I would do but that's something that the contractor is required to do okay that's for all construction on the property line that's that's a pretty typical case okay any other Commissioners have any comments okay can we hear from Tanya yep um the only reason that this application is here is because the original approval um was intended to keep the rear yard garage just so you guys have um a memory of uh what it at least at least what we're talking about okay so this is this is the bower side it is a corner property um they are uh proposing again just to renovate that um and they proposing to keep this and to add on to it um the the structure is already demolished and resolution pretty clear as with every single one of our resolutions and every single one of our approvals you must follow that approval to the letter of the law and if you do not um you can be issued a violation Andor um not issued a CO so we are in the process of the uh construction the the structure is already demolished it's better to be here this point than it to be than to be later when someone's seeking a CEO um but that is primarily the reason that they are here there was the intention to keep those garages those garages were uh found to be unstable they did remove them and so they do need permission from this board to deviate from the original approve plant and and the structure will look exactly as it was we're just deviating because everything it needs to be replaced because everything was kind of rotting out that's what we're voting on tonight okay any other comments okay um I'm asking for a motion from one from a commissioner to approve um I motion I'm sorry I motion to I'm sorry go ahead go ahead I motion to approve z223 020 74 B Street um with a with said variances what is that with the um yeah with the said variances okay can I get a second I second okay Francisco can you take a vote on a motion to approve commissioner Allen yes commissioner Zuki yes commissioner shadid yes commissioner Bole yes Vice chair Aro yes and chair Coyle yes okay motion carries all in favor hi thank thank you everybody have a good evening and I uh very much look forward to seeing everybody in person next year yeah thank you okay take care take care have a good holiday you too Madam chair yes maybe it's best if we um approve the calendar yes because we're going to have to postpone uh carry these cases okay to the next calendar so let's why we do the calendar first okay then Francisco and Tanya can tell us if we're going to adjourn these these cases to January 11th or the 25th whatever so so we're not going to be hearing z21 d74 chuckt so I'm sorry but I Francisco did Chuck respond no he hasn't I don't see him either um but I was going to say we also should approve the board contract uh the board attorney contract and also the position yeah we're gonna do all that but I I thought first we should do is just clear up the agenda yeah that Mak carry everything in case there's public listening so we know where we're carrying it to yes just so we're clear uh we did we did have uh Francisco you did send all of us a calendar yes for the proposed calendar for 2024 is everybody review it we have any problems with it we could just pass it as is yes well as far as I'm concerned yes yes me too okay with me okay we have a motion to approve the calendar that was sent out for 2024 everybody in favor I hi all right there goes that now so now we have a calendar and so let's start uh we we had basically we're adjourning most of this calendar so yeah first case uh and the SEC 11 and 12 case z20 d019 z20 d020 that the both uh concerns 64-68 Harman Street and 413 419 Arlington Avenue so that case was already carried from November 9th to today with a preservation of notice so does Francisco do you know what uh will carry this again with a preservation of notice but do you know when it is do you have a preference jary I believe they said January 11th which is our first meeting of the Year okay so we'll carry that to January 11th now that that's another issue right now but uh some attorneys are going to want to re notice just to be 100% sure but I don't see why we just can't carry it with a preservation of notices if what some of the attorneys think it's safer to Ren notice that's up to them but right now we're going to carry this to January 11th with the preservation notice right we already discussed uh number 13 so Mr Joseph is going to Reen notice for that case 68 W Street and that leaves uh case z22 d89 which is 128 Glenwood Avenue I had spoken to Mr wine about that that case was carried from November 9th to tonight and we're going to carry that again to when Francisco the 11th or the 25th the 11 so that case will be carried to the 11th with preservation of notice um and again the only difference now is that uh this is going to be in person right on the 11th yes similarly z20 D which is z20 d102 that's 129 lyen Avenue that was carried for November 9th to tonight with a preservation of notice so again we're going to carry that we're going to present Reserve their notices and send it to January 11th uh in case anybody's out there in the public looking for this similarly case uh 16 z21 D 074 that's 238-247 street that was also carried from November 9th with a preservation of notice and we're going to carry that again with a preservation of notice to January 11th and that leaves us with case 17 z22 d77 and that is 104 Glenwood and again that's uh that was carried from November 9th and with with tonight with a preservation of notice and again we're going to carry that with a preservation of notice to January 11th so that that takes care of at least the agenda and now we have uh some January will be very busy day no busy night I'm sorry yeah but we we we like to be busy it's keeps us out of trouble so we have uh three uh resolutions to memorialize and then two board contracts but let's get finished with the resolutions the first is z 2023 D14 it's the in at Garfield LLC the address was 222-224 Garfield Avenue it was an application for site plan Amendment approval with a c variance that was heard October 19th present on October 19th for chairperson Coyle Commissioners shadid Bole Silva Park and Allen that passed five in favor one opposed the one opposed was chairperson Coyle so all in favor of memorializing that is I hi and the next one was case uh z22 d58 it was in the matter of 84-88 Beacon Development LLC that was heard October 26th that was an application for preliminary and final M minor excuse me major site plan approval with a use variance bulk Vari and design waiver exception approval present on October 26 where acting chair uh aroyo and Commissioners Allen Z ziki shadid Brown pel and Bo and I let me count that again uh that's seven Commissioners and that was pasted seven in favor none opposed all in favor of memorializing that and the last resolution was heard on uh December 9th that application was z23 d025 in the matter of arabito Roman or rayon that was an application for bulk variants and design waivers present on November 9th where uh acting chair a Royo and Commissioners Allan ziki shadid Park and Bo that passed six in favor none opposed all in favor of memorializing that is I I all okay now we have uh two contracts and uh two uh resolutions for approval the first is for Bridget's contract for uh stenographic services for the zoning board uh I don't know if we want to have any discussion of it but we just it's her contract that we approve every year I think we should just take a vote is that we do yes so there's the agreement for stenographic services which is uh the same thing uh every year and there's the resolution to approve that so we'll start with the agreement um it's her standard contract um I think that uh our resolution is going to authorize uh the chairperson myself Francisco as a secretary of the board and Bridget to sign that so all in favor of that agreement I anybody oppose I I same with the resolution authorizing us to adopt this contract good to go everybody good to go good okay now the next is the more controversial one that's my contract we need discussion Vinnie uh about this CL doors executive session yeah send me out to pasture anyway it's the same contract uh I think for the last 20 years it's a the agreement for services hasn't changed in terms of the fee and the resolution adopting that so is there any problem with it no I anybody I'm sorry so do I say all in favor are we having a Christmas body this year it's up to you guys not about all in favor I that's for that's for the Christmas bodyy or what know we we we we we we we kind of suspended those parties because of but we can talk about it next year we don't have to it's always tough to do it around December but we want to get together in January that I'm all in favor of that okay it's up to you okay we talk think about it and I'll send a email out and we figure out a date in January that'd be great great okay hopefully there's some new members on the board by then too that would be a nice idea because cting it close yeah because the 11 11 100 is is not good right b00 % yeah right now the 11th I'm right now I'm good but it may change by the end of the month so that's always going to be tough but I won't know that till then so until all good who we talked about getting new Commissioners but would be nice to have a little cushion yeah have a cushion right okay so with that said if we have no other business I guess we could I just have one question who do I have to send an email to about my about my um license plate Sheila so respond to the email that she sent I can I can it to you tomorrow because of course I don't know I have to go look at my cars I have no idea okay okay so if we have no other business um I your registration you got the blate number on it that's in the car I think I think she's just asking for the Mak a model no she's asking for the license plate too license plate too I know make a model make model is easy it's the license plate that you forget it s maybe we should close the public do you want to close the meeting Bridget doesn't have to take all this down right let's close the public portion of the meeting and let's take uh I make a motion to adjourn the meeting can I get a second I'll second all in favor okay meeting adjourned so Francisco just close it off let's get to like when there's only 10 of us on